Can we just tell the town of Atherton to not exist? Atherton is a "general law" city of California and the legislature can dissolve it with a simple majority vote. The purpose of a city in California is to advance and further state policy, so I never understood why the state stands around acting powerless while reactionaries thwart broadly supported state initiatives.
The problem would also be solved by building affordable housing under the new state initiatives, which prohibit the cities to block construction. New residents will very quickly dominate the voter base, problem solved.
> The purpose of a city in California is to advance and further state policy,
The purpose of ALL government is to _serve_ citizens. There are too many people who see government as the bully pulpit, which is bad enough, but to openly lust after that power is always unsettling to me.
While we're at it, if we just built more train-trailer-homes and moved all the Californians into them, we could solve the entire state's housing problems AND get everybody to take transit every day AND improve air pollution. Census counts would become a lot easier too.
Homeowners don't want to move? No problem, just eminent domain them or invent some new CEQA provision by a simple majority vote. It's about time the state learned to use its powers!
Atherton residents include the NBA's Stephen Curry, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, venture capitalists Marc Andreessen, Bill Gurley, Doug Leone etc. A fuller list is toward the end of this Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atherton,_California
There might be some brave souls willing to pick a fight with Atherton's leading citizens. But no one like that is serving in the state legislature.
